These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Events and Gatherings Archive

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Fanfest 2012 Breaking News: Factional Warfare

First post
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#21 - 2012-03-23 17:23:33 UTC
Pram Tet Ruins wrote:
I am a new player. I decided to go down the datacore road for passive income. Does this mean I should stop? And, if so, thanks for nothing CCP, you've ruined my first few weeks. I thought the goal was to keep paying accounts these days?

Yes, you should stop right now, but that has nothing to do with any changes. You will be bored to tears trying to grind the standings and skills for datacore research when you should be just getting into better ships to access more content in the game.

The income is only noticeable if you invest heavily in it across several characters, and even than it only supplements isk over a long term basis, it will never be enough to sustain ship losses in the short term.

If you want accessible passive income that has a much more interesting future (giving Dust’s release) I would look into Planetary Interaction.

Once you’re well established in the game, than if you want to set them up as an investment (like a stock portfolio or savings bonds) than go for it. But in the short term, it will only hold you back from doing a lot of other stuff instead, and won’t pay you enough to be worth it.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Ajita al Tchar
#22 - 2012-03-23 18:30:26 UTC
mentalkiller wrote:
I don't even know what factional warfare is.
All I know is that eveonline lacks consensual PVP or at least a place where you could go and have PVP for sure, and not camp a gate or wait for something to happen.

1) RvB
2) ask for 1v1's in local in busy systems like Amarr and whatnot (you'll have hits and misses, ofc)
3) go through any wormhole that spawns in a busy system near trade hubs, stay uncloaked in space, boom, 99.5% guaranteed PvP
Ajita al Tchar
#23 - 2012-03-23 18:34:10 UTC
CCP, I understand the desire to remove the word "passive" from the current datacore farming mechanic. Moving any datacores to FW LP stores sound dumb, though. Why would anyone even think of that? It doesn't fit in with the idea of what FW is (pew pew), it doesn't go with the backstory, it just doesn't make sense.

Instead you can consider other changes, like introducing more R&D agents but making them only give RP if you complete missions for them. Just don't move any datacores to FW. It won't be fixing a problem, it will just be a nonsensical change.
Shalee Lianne
Northern Coalition.
#24 - 2012-03-23 19:18:09 UTC
I don't know what a datacore is either lol  ~ Roleplay blog. ~ Faction War blog.
In Fidem
#25 - 2012-03-23 19:33:37 UTC
It's just that I only have one character and got used to the 60 mil / month due to datacore farming which I began a few months ago. And I have no interest in getting rid of this form of income.

So far no one delivered an explanation why datacores even should be available in the LP store in the future - which isn't just stoopid because no one will ever look for datacores in the FW LP store; but it also would remove a neat form of passive income for a *lot* of ppl out there who don't even do FW.

The State will not fall. Join us. Fight. Conquer.

edit: disregard that, the state has fallen.

Sutha Moliko
#26 - 2012-03-23 20:47:05 UTC
CCP Navigator wrote:

• First in line is to provide proper consequences by denying docking access to stations located in enemy space and allowing players to upgrade their captured solar systems by spending FW LPs into the Control Bunker.
cture Hub in the system.

Enemy space. Does it mean that denying docking access apply to stations in high sec too ? By default all high sec regions are under one faction Sovereignty...
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2012-03-24 01:43:51 UTC
I cant believe ccp thinks this docking stuff is a good idea.

Its like they arnt even listening to actual FW players just retreads of ideas from years ago that would not work in the current environment.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **

Seriphyn Inhonores
Elusenian Cooperative
#28 - 2012-03-24 02:01:42 UTC
Loved the presentation on FW. The problems brought up hit EVERY nail on the head, down to the Caldari NPC missile spam. My personal thanks to CCP on this.

Looking forward to the changes.
#29 - 2012-03-24 02:21:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Flyinghotpocket
you really need to add something in this fw patch, like the ability to create a personal wardec against wartarget spy alts in our militia. or just straight up vote to expel them.

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

De Re Metallica
#30 - 2012-03-24 03:15:43 UTC
Datacore isn't a massive isk generator. However it is a nice passive income generator. For me it's good as I don't need to baby sit them, and it allows me to get on with the other aspects of the game.

I don't get a lot of time to play. Making it harder to generate a small amount of ISK just makes it harder for us casual players. For the record I do a bit of totally passive, a bit of "mostly passive" and a bit of "sorta' active" and a bit of full time active. Then I go a do something dumb and get a ship blown up and have to sink all that in a new hull.

So here are my questions. (by the way: If they were answered in the presentation then you'll figure out that I didn't watch the presentation.)

First: What the hell is wrong with datacore generation anyway? I can't see it needs nerfing. It's impact is a drop in the ocean.

Second: What the hell has this got to do with Factional Warfare. For the life of me; I simply can't see it. - If I put a tinfoil hat on I'd suggest that you are trying to slip this one out where industrialists won't see it.

Third: If you needed to ping datacores then I'd start with requiring interaction with the agent IE you need to pay a visit after a certain number of points were reached and (like with most RL R&D guys) to stroke his ego until he gets on with the job Blink (Before I get flames, I've spent my career in development....I've seen, participated and been guilty myself).

Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-03-24 04:12:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Andre Vauban
CCP Navigator wrote:

• First in line is to provide proper consequences by denying docking access to stations located in enemy space

Please, please, please don't do this. This will result in one side winning and the other side not being able to fight back because they cannot base out of systems close enough to take systems back. Once one side has conquered all/most of the lowsec station systems, it will be game over because the losing side will have no place to base out of in order to take systems back. You need to REALLY think about this.

CCP Navigator wrote:

• We then discussed a general decrease to passive Datacore gains, as we want to add Datacore offers in the FW LP stores.

Again, this is very scary. I could see this causing a massive spike in datacore prices, which causes a spike in T2 prices, which turns T2 BPOs into huge isk printing machines again which is what invention was created to end the T2 monopolies. If you do decide the datacores are better as LP items, then they should be in the normal NPC LP stores as well (maybe cheaper in FW though). FW only will NOT be able to meet the demand for datacores without inviting a HUGE influx of farming alts which is exactly what FW does not need.


Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#32 - 2012-03-24 05:59:09 UTC
Steve Celeste wrote:
Hey FW guys we heard you hate sov warfare, so we put some of it into your FW so you can ragequit while you selfdestruct.

Painfully, painfully, true.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Julius Foederatus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2012-03-24 06:10:41 UTC
The docking rights thing has needed to happen for ages. Honestly, I don't think it goes far enough. I'd like to see it so any neutral with really bad faction standings towards the sov holding faction can't dock in a warzone station. Not only would it cut down on incredibly stupid pirate carrier/station games, it would be a lot less ridiculous than having people who shoot you on a regular basis as your neighbors.

And as far as the sov stuff goes, I'm all for it as long as you don't go overboard and make it so not having it is painful.

Gameplay should be about consequences. If you don't defend your systems, you lose your access. Anything else is just asking ccp to hold your hands and give you a cookie. In other words, it ain't EVE.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#34 - 2012-03-24 06:19:49 UTC
Julius Foederatus wrote:

Gameplay should be about consequences. If you don't defend your systems, you lose your access.

The critical thing is protecting game play diversity. True sovereignty holding, with total station lockout, investment in infrastructure, etc. are precisely the sort of game play that already exists in 0.0, and does not need to be duplicated in low sec.

Saying "thats just EVE" doesnt take into consideration the fact that militia pilots have been engaged in FW for years to not have to hassle with these things.

Militia pilots want fights. We want a plexing systems and reward system that YES, absolutely gives cookies and points two groups of feral cats at each others throats. Beyond that is where everyone in Faction Warfare starts diverging in what they want for the feature.

I think there are ways we can add reward and consequence to the system without duplicating 0.0 game play and reducing the number of things there are to do in EVE.

This is what CCP and the CSM have been saying - they want create a system that works well for Faction Warfare first and foremost. Now is the time to hold them to their word. This "streamlining" of 0.0 and FW gameplay is precisely what everyone has been screaming to prevent since the Winter Summit.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Baroness Samcar
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2012-03-24 06:58:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Baroness Samcar
If R&D agents are removed, and datacores moved to faction warfare, I would damn well expect to have the skills i trained for this to be refunded.
- On average, nearly 3 months of skills were trained just for datacores.
- Its pretty bloody annoying to have those skills trained and no longer reap the benefits.
- No, i dont want to use those skills for copying blueprints, I trained them purely for datacores.

CCP needs to look at ways to IMPROVE aspects of the game, not alienate players by nerfing things that players have spent large amounts of time on setting up, and fine tuning their characters to make isk so they dont need to spend heaps of time just making isk to support pvp.

The amount of time spent to a) train the skills, and b) grind the required faction means that any player that ahs datacore agents setup will have wasted a massive amount of time and effort in something that could be pretty much redundant...

Can a dev please give us a more detailed explanation of intended nerfs to datacore production.
Julius Foederatus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2012-03-24 08:10:06 UTC
I don't see it as that big a deal honestly. It's not like you're pushed out of your area completely, you can always fall back to high sec or elsewhere and continue to fight. You can never be fully pushed out of the warzone. Not to mention it also serves the function of establishing an organic frontline, since you won't be able to maintain operations too far from your own space due to logistics and enemy reinforcements.
Wings of Caldari
#37 - 2012-03-24 10:18:49 UTC
Looks like a great improvement for FW, really pleased to see the attention going into FW.

Cant wait!!
Eric Deloitte
The Flowing Penguins
#38 - 2012-03-24 10:54:36 UTC
With regards to the comments about Datacores what is getting lost in the

"Nerf Passive Income Vs I want my SP back" debate

is that datacores form part of the cost of nearly every T2 item and ship.

If Datacores go from being Passive to Active then I would expect their price to go up, if they go up then so will T2 equipment and ships. As an example a T2 cruiser hull uses about 10 million isk in Datacores for invention, if this goes up expect to see further inflation on T2

Personally as a Producer and Consumer of Datacores, the income on Datacores is such a trickle, that its realistically a nice little bonus every now and again and if I lost it I wouldn't really feel it, but I'd be concerned about putting another bottleneck into T2 Production that would make prices rise.
Susan Black
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#39 - 2012-03-24 14:17:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Susan Black
Completely removing access to all stations in a system is problematic due to the nature of Faction War mechanics. What people do not understand is that flipping a system from one faction to another is a process that can take as little as 8 hours.

Therefore, you can go to bed, and if people in another time zone do not plex or defend, you can lose access to your stuff in that station.

There are several problems with this

1. This essentially nerfs pvp. If you can't get to your ships, or don't have the ability to base close to the warzone due to station mechanics, you are essentially making it more difficult for people to pvp in FW. (Not making the pvp more difficult, which would be fine...but actually making it harder to pvp at all.

2. The inability to dock in all stations doesnt make sense from a storyline perspective. Why would a station that is irrelevant to FW (ie: The Scope) prevent me from docking

3. The fact that neutrals can all dock means that you are essentially getting punished for being in FW. You are in FW so suddenly you may not be able to dock. You shuld be encouraging people to join FW, and this definately does not do it

4. FW, for good or bad, encourages new pvpers to join its ranks. In my opinion, if I was new, the inability to access my stuff, and the focus that would be needed for me to figure out the station/FW mechanics and try to location to somewhere 'safe' etc would be a show stopper. I would say, "well, this is really dumb and unproductive, I think I will go play something else now.

This will have multiple results

  • People will leave Faction War and fight as neutral instead due to frustration with the system

  • People will spend a lot of time and effort focusing on how to get around the system (ie: using neutral alts to get to their stuff) in stead of focusing on playing EVE and having fun

  • What they could do instead:

    -Don't prevent docking, just prevent use of some of the station's facilities. Or

    -Have the station guns that currently shoot GCCs shoot whomever the opposing militia is. We can still sneak in, but we certainly can't camp the station easily, or use it as effectively. Or

    -Have the current stations permanently belong ONLY to the people in that militia. (No neutrals, no opposing militia.) Have station guns 'turn off' if opposing militia takes over, and remove access to agents, or something to that effect. Make it very desireable to keep the station in ownership, but

    do not make the consequences a show stopper for many EVE players. @gamerchick42

    Susan Black
    Ice Fire Warriors
    Infinite Pew
    #40 - 2012-03-24 14:45:32 UTC
    The LP system in eve is broken. I'm not talking about how we get LP or what we can buy.

    Right now, EVE has a pretty complicated, player driven market. The reason it's so good is because it's so multi-faceted, so player driven, so open for people to use it in different ways.

    The LP market is a static market that is not based on supply and demand. Basically, you farm missions, you buy whatever you want that is provided by a NPC.

    What if, instead, they made it more supply and demand and more player controlled?

    What if...players could sell things to the market 'pool' for LP, then use their lp to buy other stuff? What if you could use LP to buy practical items like non faction ships in that militia's race, (ie: the Minmatar could buy hurricanes, etc.)

    1. This would encourage militias to use ships that belong to their militia. It would expand the RPness of FW a little in a totally non creepy way.

    2. You develop a cycle between missioning and plexing to support pvpers, and visa versa.

    3. You give people the ability to essentially 'fund' their war efforts.

    4. Players could supply warzones, gain LP, and use the LP to buy faction items that they could then sell or use.

    Putting stuff that's irrelevant to Faction War in the LP store only encourages people to 'farm' LP in missions without having to have any interest in actually participating in FW.

    It also forces mechanics on people, which goes against the sandbox. You should not be forced to do FW missions in order to achieve access to an item that is largely irrelevant to FW. It's way too contrived a system. @gamerchick42